April, 2012

Whether or not you have an EHR, having consistent clinical protocols is vital.  I am a fan of the oft-misunderstood Bright Futures, myself, but even BF doesn't cover everything.  One missing piece of the puzzle was filled about a year ago when MedImmune, in collaboration with NICHQ,  unveiled what I call the "Preemie Toolkit."  Acually, that's what they call it too, now that I think about it.

I was really interested in the project because it gave PCC an opportunity to include some crucial pediatric content in our EHR.  The toolkit includes a wide (and deep) variety of preemie tools, from handouts to checklists to actual chart note templates.  PCC incorporated them into our EHR last January (I think we're the only ones to do so) and they are free to any PCC client. [You can see what we did here.]

I just heard that the Toolkit has been updated, which is delightful, as we know it's a living project.  Updates include:

• The various forms can now be either a) printed blank and completed manually (previous feature) or b) the editable pdfs can be downloaded and saved to the user’s desktop for electronic completion (new feature). None of the forms can be completed directly on the website itself;
• Additional content resources have been included in each section;
• Indexed quick links appear at the top of each respective section;
• A Site Map is now featured;
• A Feedback button is now featured, without asking for the user’s e-mail address or contact information. Once the user clicks the Submit button, the comments are sent to a monitored e-mail inbox. No comments are displayed on the website or in any public forum; and
• The website has been optimized for viewing on mobile devices

It doesn't matter who your EHR vendor is or even if you have one - this is protocol gold and it's free.  Can't beat that.

Many of you are familiar with the 96110 RVU snafu at the beginning of 2012.  CMS removed all the RVUs for the 96110 and then, with the help of the AAP making noise, replaced the values.

Apparently, a number of  payers took this as an opportunity to stop paying on the 96110 altogether. Sigh.

We did a quick check after hearing numerous complaints on SOAPM and PedTalk - it looks like there has been a slight tick in 96110 payments, but not an outright denial.  Please share your experience!

[click on the image to get a close up]

 It looks to me as though the payments started slowing pre-2012, so we can't blame CMS.  Note that our client charges also drop - perhaps PCC added enough new clients using this procedure that our sample changed?

Input welcomed.